Search Results

You are looking at 11 - 17 of 17 items for :

  • Langmuir circulation x
  • Monthly Weather Review x
  • Refine by Access: All Content x
Clear All

present time, however, thereis no completely accept,ed explanation.As soon as some raindrops have been produced by uuto-conversion or coalescence, raindrops begin to fall withdifferent velocilies depending upon their sizes. In thecourse of this fall, they are envisaged to collect clouddroplets through the continuous collection process de-scribed by Langmuir (1948). The rate of growth of anindividual drop by this process is proportional to themixing ratio of cloud droplets.On the other hand, we know

Full access
Tommy R. Shepherd, W. David Rust, and Thomas C. Marshall

, 1993: Mesovortex circulations seen by air borne Doppler radar within a bow-echo mesoscale convective system. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 74, 2146-2157.Knight, C. A., 1979: Observations of the morphology of melting snow. J. A tmos. Sci., 36, 1123-1130.Marshall, T. C., and W. D. Rust, 1991: Electric field soundings through thunderstorms. J. Geophys. Res., 96, 22 297-22 306.---, and --, 1993: Two types of vertical electrical structures in stratiform precipitation regmns of mesoscale convective

Full access
Sergey Frolov, William Campbell, Benjamin Ruston, Craig H. Bishop, David Kuhl, Maria Flatau, and Justin McLay

error covariance. Our diurnal SST model ( McLay et al. 2012 ) was based on Takaya et al. (2010) , which represents the following surface layer processes: shortwave and longwave radiative flux, evaporation, molecular thermal conduction, and wind-driven turbulent diffusion determined through Monin–Obhukov similarity theory. Unlike the original model of Takaya et al. (2010) , our implementation did not represent impact of Langmuir circulation directly. Instead the friction velocity was multiplied by

Free access
Mahdi Mohammadi-Aragh, Martin Losch, and Helge F. Goessling

framework . Meteor. Appl. , 15 , 51 – 64 , . 10.1002/met.25 Farmer , D. , and M. Li , 1995 : Patterns of bubble clouds organized by Langmuir circulation . J. Phys. Oceanogr. , 25 , 1426 – 1440 ,<1426:POBCOB>2.0.CO;2 . 10.1175/1520-0485(1995)025<1426:POBCOB>2.0.CO;2 Feltham , D. L. , 2008 : Sea ice rheology . Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. , 40 , 91 – 112 , . 10

Open access
Donald R. MacGorman and Kurt E. Nielsen

mesocyclone circulation and structure could account for much of the variation in total flash rates. Further more, they noted that the very strong updrafts in the Binger storm may have been responsible for the suppression of ground flashes near the mesocyclone when it was strongest. Although the variations in lightning flash rates of- the Binger storm were consistent with many of thesferics studies, some of the sferics studies also foundexceptions. Furthermore, the Binger storm was an unusually strong

Full access
Maribeth Stolzenburg, Thomas C. Marshall, W. David Rust, and Bradley F. Smull

= 16km. The plan-view location of the cross section in Fig. l0 is alsomarked for reference.Fig. 9; they depict a familiar pattern of lower-tropospheric mesoscale descent overlain by a mesoscale updraft within the stratiform cloud. The magnitude ofthese mesoscale circulations is relatively weak, however, with peak descent of -23 cm s-~ at 2.5 km andweak ascent of less than 10 cm s-l above 5 km. (Analogous profiles over similarly large domains withinother COPS-91 MCS stratiform regions have

Full access
Stephen J. Keighton, Howard B. Bluestein, and Donald R. MacGorman

features such as a tornadic vortex signature (TVS)(Brown et al. 1978) cannot be resolved. Only stormscale circulations, like the mesocyclone, can be detected. The unambiguous range of the Norman radaris variable depending upon the pulse-repetition frequency used; in this study the range is 115 or 161 km,and the corresponding unambiguous velocity is +34or +23 m s-l. (The latter unambiguous range and velocity were valid only during the later radar scans whenstorms were farther away.) Storm motion

Full access